# We have good package naming guidelines

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/we-have-good-package-naming-guidelines/15173>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Created:** [September 19, 2018, 11:55am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/we-have-good-package-naming-guidelines/15173 "2018-09-19T11:55:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![JeffreySarnoff](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/jeffreysarnoff/32/1980_2.png) [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 11:55am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/we-have-good-package-naming-guidelines/15173/1 "2018-09-19T11:55:32Z")

</div>

And I have noticed submissions to METADATA that are oblivious to their beauty.  
It is doing the inexperienced author a favor when a package reviewer lets the person know about the relevant part of the docs and these examples: [Naming/PackagesAndModules.md at master · JuliaPraxis/Naming · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaPraxis/Naming/blob/master/guides/PackagesAndModules.md).